Talk

Advanced search

Spousal veto

(427 Posts)
midgebabe Sat 11-Jan-20 10:02:16

So I have read various transwidow and spousal veto threads but am still struggling to understand why (rationally, not emotively) I should support the continuation of the spousal veto as it is commonly called (spousal untangling period). I guess because what I see on those threads is so much mixed up with hurt and abuse.

I am starting the thread because if it isn’t clear to me then I suspect it would be difficult to make the case to others outside of the feminist community.

I have seen

It’s necessary for women who’s religion does not allow divorce…but that to me is a wider problem than just transition …what happens to those women in DV cases etc

No one should be forced into a lesbian marriage ..which seems homophobic , like what’s wrong with lesbian marriage. I guess I also struggle here because whilst the words have changed once the legal process has completed, the person hasn’t

If we take out abuse, people changing beyond recognition, someone using the transition as a way to bully/taunt the other person, why should one legal process be dependent on the other?

Or is it rarely possible to take abuse out of this? Even if people may not be totally happy, there are cases where people have stayed together "in sickness and in health" , and their lack of joy may be related to viewing this as a health problem rather than an indication of abuse?

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost Sat 11-Jan-20 10:05:11

No one should be forced into a lesbian marriage ..which seems homophobic , like what’s wrong with lesbian marriage.

I think you are dilibrately missing the "forced" aspect here.

CuriousaboutSamphire Sat 11-Jan-20 10:12:48

Wait. You're saying that if the person you marry legally changes sex, does or does not get surgery, changes name and appearance and, to all intents and purposes is now a woman that their wife MUST accept all of that, refer to herself as a lesbian and quietly sit down and shut the duck up?

The veto should be there so the trans person has an adult discussion with their partner and they sort out their future without any coersion

midgebabe Sat 11-Jan-20 10:15:21

lesbian doesn't even mean lesbian , the persons biology has not changed .

But that aside it still comes across to me that the person thinks there something fundamentally wrong with a lesbian marriage that you would consider that you would only be doing that if forced . It's the fact that it's not the person you are being forced to marry, its the lesbian aspect that is a problem

Would you say if someone says "I will never marry an Indian" that there might be an element of racism in there?

Deliriumoftheendless Sat 11-Jan-20 10:19:04

What if a person in a gay marriage transitions? Does it still apply? Would the other spouse have to define themselves as heterosexual?

midgebabe Sat 11-Jan-20 10:25:50

The words are irrelevent because the meaning of lesbian etc is changed once you allow them to be based on gender identity not sex

Is there no argument for the veto that does not rely on the homosexuality aspect?

OneEpisode Sat 11-Jan-20 10:26:08

And the GRC process means backdating everything, so showing that the couple entered into their marriage or civil partnership with their post GRC names and genders. A lesbian might not want to have to divorce a legal man she would never have chosen to marry/partner.

LangCleg Sat 11-Jan-20 10:34:03

It's homophobic to refuse to pretend to be homosexual?

I think you have that the wrong way around, my friend.

testing987654321 Sat 11-Jan-20 10:35:33

I suggest you read some of the trans widows threads. If you are not happy with your husband "becoming a woman" it's extremely distressing to have your whole relationship rewritten by your husband.

Imnobody4 Sat 11-Jan-20 10:35:43

midgebabe You just had to bring race into it didn't you.

Feminazgul Sat 11-Jan-20 10:35:58

Like what’s wrong with lesbian marriage

Nothing, if you are a lesbian.

Deliriumoftheendless Sat 11-Jan-20 10:36:06

I may be misunderstanding this point but surely it’s not homophobic to say you would not marry a woman if you are heterosexual and a woman.

LangCleg Sat 11-Jan-20 10:36:35

Not that it's anything much to do with with removing an escape clause for women in marriages whose terms are being fundamentally and unilaterally changed, but the homophobia here is rebranding straight women as lesbians when they aren't lesbians. That is homophobic to actual lesbians.

I can't quite believe I'm reading this thread.

OldCrone Sat 11-Jan-20 10:39:34

Would you say if someone says "I will never marry an Indian" that there might be an element of racism in there?

Would you have the same issue with a lesbian who said "I would never marry a man"?

Cwenthryth Sat 11-Jan-20 10:41:32

It’s not a spousal veto. No one can ‘veto’ anyone else’s transition - it’s a spousal exit clause. I think you need to do a bit more reading OP. Do you think people should have the right to easily exit a marriage if the terms of that marriage are fundamentally changed by the other party?

Sexequality Sat 11-Jan-20 10:41:49

The so-called ‘spousal veto’ just means someone seeking to change sex has to divorce first if his/her partner does not wish to be married to someone who has changed sex. Why is that so terrible? A marriage is meant to be a partnership of equals so why does one party get to drastically change the whole nature of the marriage without the other party having any say?

If two people where in a business partnership running a cafe and one party decided they would rather make porn then surely it would be reasonable to allow the other to say ‘no, I am not happy with porn if you want to do that you will have to leave our cafe partnership’ rather than them having to become part of the porn industry before being allowed to leave the business?

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:44:44

Having done a great deal of research on this, this sets out my position (again).

https://makemorenoisemanc.wixsite.com/mysite/post/trans-widows-and-the-spousal-veto-a-modern-fable-of-male-entitlement

KettlePolly Sat 11-Jan-20 10:45:39

Having had to wait out the bog standard 2 year agreed separation which was really hard even though he'd moved out and wasn't transitioning to anything other than more of a cock, I can see having to wait that long, possibly longer if they don't want to divorce, with a a "differently gendered" stranger essentially in your house still potentially, would be really traumatic.

If transitioning is as fundamentally profoundly significant as we are required to think, then its affect on a marriage must be seen to be similarly significant.

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:46:25

Previous thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3717872-Trans-Widows-the-Liberal-Democrats-and-the-Spousal-Veto

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:48:47

It's probably hopelessly vain to quote yourself but I'm going to do it to save time:

* The arguments around this issue boil down to this: Which is the greater evil, a heterosexual woman being trapped in a same sex marriage against her will, or her husband having his Gender Recognition Certificate delayed while his wife leaves the marriage.*

* It is a prime example of the strength of male entitlement and of society’s unquestioning acceptance of it, that so far it is the “Spousal Veto” narrative that is entirely framing the debate. Males must have complete agency and females must serve.*
 

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:51:03

Jess Phillip's championing the removal of asking the consent of a woman before her marriage changes. http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3787357-Jess-Phillips-championing-the-removal-of-asking-the-consent-of-a-woman-before-her-marriage-changes

Most recent thread showing a heartening amount of support for trans widows

JonnyPocketRocket Sat 11-Jan-20 10:52:36

WTF am I reading? OP in what other situations do you think people should be forced to be married to someone they don't want to be married to? And why on EARTH should anyone ever have to pretend to have a sexuality they don't actually have??

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:52:56

* So I have read various transwidow and spousal veto threads but am still struggling to understand why (rationally, not emotively)*

Are you saying trans widows views should not be listened to because they are not rational?

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:54:08

* If we take out abuse, people changing beyond recognition, someone using the transition as a way to bully/taunt the other person, why should one legal process be dependent on the other?*

Have you read the trans widows threads? How do you propose to take abuse out of a relationship?

TinselAngel Sat 11-Jan-20 10:55:46

No one should be forced into a lesbian marriage ..which seems homophobic , like what’s wrong with lesbian marriage. I guess I also struggle here because whilst the words have changed once the legal process has completed, the person hasn’t

Yes, they always have changed, usually beyond all recognition. Again read the trans widows threads.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »